All Activity

Great job. Someone already wrote this, the most anticipated mod for me. I have one question. Am I blind or am I missing something?

I would advise running at 72Hz rather than capping the frame rate in DCS. 90Hz is probably means that you are maxing out your system.

Could anybody please elaborate on the gain control for the F-1's radar? It seems that it has no effect on the display. But maybe I am using it wrong...

Folks please don't derail the thread with subscription chatter, we have said many times in the past its not something that will work for DCS, and we have no plans for it. Topic here is Pacific Operations Assets Pack | Mission Save Development Progress | New Free Trials thank you

Sorry es ging um die NavPoints welche ehemals für die A-10C gedacht waren. Nicht die Wegpunktaktion der einzelnen Module oder KI-Maschinen. Das ist mit bewusst dass diese bei allen DCS Modulen funzen Die NavPoints setzen ja aber ein System wie ne CDU voraus, hätte aber zum jetzigen Stand der CH-47 eher nicht damit gerechnet dass diese schon nutzbar sind.

ED has only talked about the WW2 version, nothing else at this time.

It's been said repeatedly that a subscription system (and benefits) doesn't work in DCS World... for many subscribers, priorities aren't going to change, and their main business model is selling modules, not charity. Huge amounts of money are already being spent (which a subscription system doesn't compensate for unless you're an MMO), and this would force you to sell "expansions" at AAA prices to cover costs... Also, I love that assumption, "just sign up for a subscription and the problems will be fixed."...let's not dream of castles in the air. Turning the wheels isn't going to change things that have been happening for 30 years, much less "forcing" directions in the management of product lines because you want to step on the gas... Building functionality into the core isn't just about having a monkey hack code. Either you have competent staff (which is very expensive), or nothing gets done here. Let's also remember that much of the "competition" hasn't even come close to what we have today in the combat department. If someone wants to put money into making a module, they can: - Form a third party and do it themselves. - Try another KS... we know how the previous one ended.

I believe the MiG-29 will drop first. Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

I'm asking if we can get later configurations as well. The class (especially New Jersey) served off and on until 1992

Wow i didn't know there was such a thing

ED hasn't given any news about the new AI damage model coming, much less a ship damage model that requires massive core changes, such as flooding, fire, or structural damage.

I agree sometimes negative feedback can seem like a pain to listen to but we as humans are always learning and sometimes negative feedback is just as important as positive, having said that it's always nice to get more positive just so you know you're heading in the right direction

Wow you managed to get the pfp7 working as well. You sir are my hero. can’t wait for you to post the instructions, so I can also get this working. Obviously I did get it for the PMDG 777, but deep down I always hoped I could also use it for the Chinook, C130 and A10. fantastic work sir.

M3 already added some of its assets with the release of the F4-U, but not all of them. For now, those in the ED PTO assets have not been released.

Most settings are high/max but I did lower shadows to low and clouds to standard to help provide some headroom. 90hz gives frame time of 11.11 but 72hz give 14 ish. Interestingly the Crystal OG at 120 hz Gave a Solid 8.33. No 120 hz option with the Super at this time unfortunately. if you don’t already do the following please try: Task Manager Details tab Right click on DCS (after log in) Select Priority and set to High, NOT Realtiime) Should help. But has to be done everytime you log in.

I hope Deka will raise this to Ed and bring back a result: the JF17 is an amazing jet/module and serve the best .

Looking at DCS objectively, one has to recognize what an incredible achievement it is. The sound design alone is a marvel. Yes, there are some "weirdities" here and there, but I've noticed that ED has "the eye on the ball" and are steadily patching up stuff. Many fixes have not impacted me, and I often view them as a disappointment. Which of course a completely emotional/subjective thing. When looking at changelogs I allways look for stuff I personally would see improved. Sometimes it is there. Other times not. ..and I can not believe why they didn't adress that. All in all I can't believe how lucky I am to be able to take part in the experience. -A huge source of joy, and also one of some frustration. But when frustrated; I try to remember my first line here: It is an Incredible, almost unbelievable achievement.

Agreed, we can not please everyone all of the time, but hopefully along the journey of DCS development we can bring some fun and joy to people who love the combat flight sim genre. We get lots of private messages from people who want to complain or want to tell us how much they like DCS, the forum is only a snap shot of what is going on. Overall I feel its positive feedback we are getting, but we will always listen to the negative feedback, it gives us insight and often gives us new ideas to work on. thank you

Yes 50 PPD

My point above about the texture format the DDS container can handle is incorrect. DDS can handle textures with more than 8bpp (and in theory any height x width, but because of mip-maps and potential rendering optimizations, textures are still usually made with dimensions which are a power of 2). I think the overall point stands, which is that DCS is flagging certain textures as not meeting requirements for conversion - but maybe there are changes going on under the hood to how textures are handled that will mean that these messages are redundant. We'll see after the next patch I guess.

I think we do (as far as I can tell). Never forget that someone who is dissatisfied with something is several times more likely to voice his/her opinion than somebody who is happy. So the forum will always be a misrepresentation about the state of affairs. Main problem will always be that you can't align the priorities of all individual customers and the business anyway.

Ive been active on the form since 2011, yes we do see posts like this occasionally, and I get it, for some it is frustrating when we do not do what they wont or how they want it. Everyone has wishes, hopes and dreams and when those are not realised it can be frustrating. Hopefully most of you enjoy DCS and want to see it continue to grow, and it is growing which is great to see, new people joining and falling in love with DCS.

As the zero was introduced in 1940, it's genuine cotemporaries' are more like a mkV Spitfire, 109-E, Wildcat etc. Against those, the Zero was an extremely dangerous aircraft. Where the Japanese failed was to assume that the progress of aircraft tech would be substantially lower than it was, so the Zero didn't go through the massive enhancement programmes that say the Spitfire and 109 experienced, and the replacement and better aircraft were too late and too few.